[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120912115841.GA32074@endeavour.taprogge.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:58:41 +0200
From: Jens Taprogge <jens.taprogge@...rogge.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
industrypack-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/20] Staging: ipack/bridges/tpci200: provide new
callbacks to tpci200
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:13:30PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:28:33AM +0200, Jens Taprogge wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:47:02AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > +static int tpci200_get_clockrate(struct ipack_device *dev)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct tpci200_board *tpci200 = check_slot(dev);
> > > > + __le16 __iomem *addr;
> > >
> > > The point of the underscores in the __le16 is that you don't want to
> > > pollute user space headers in glibc with a bunch of kernel typedefs.
> > > It is not needed here. (Or if it is, then we would need to replace
> > > the u16 uses as well).
> >
> > I was under the impression that "__le16" is used to indicate the
> > byteorder of the pointed to memory. As far as I can see that
> > information is lost when we use u16. Am I missing something?
> >
>
> Use the no-underscore version unless it's inside a header which is
> exported to userspace.
>
> le16 __iomem *addr;
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
Doing a quick
grep " le16 "
in drivers I have not found a single occurance that is not within
a comment. There are plenty of __le16 occurances though.
Best Regards,
Jens
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists